Notices


[GM HELP] Rules Q&A

   
[GM HELP] Rules Q&A

As opposed to the general purpose GM information thread, this thread is for asking advice from your fellow GMs about In-Game Rulings that you need to make, but that you aren't sure about.

I'd say (note that I've been proven wrong - several times ) that yes and yes.

First off, the spell is from school conjuration subschool
a creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence
creation that has a duration other than instantaneous, so the 'dust' last as long as the spell.

Second the area of effect is
Some effects, notably clouds and fogs, spread out from a point of origin, which must be a grid intersection. The effect can extend around corners and into areas that you can't see. Figure distance by actual distance traveled, taking into account turns the spell effect takes. When determining distance for spread effects, count around walls, not through them. As with movement, do not trace diagonals across corners. You must designate the point of origin for such an effect, but you need not have line of effect (see below) to all portions of the effect.
spread. The spell description says that all within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades, so since the 'cloud' is still there if a new creature enters the area of effect I'd say it should be susceptible to the effects.

I wouldn't think of it much different from say stinking cloud.

Edit: then again, stinking could specifically states that it creates a cloud whereas glitterdust doesn't. I then change my stance. I now picture it as a cloud of golden particles that quickly settle over whatever was in the area of effect at the time of casting, so new creatures entering the area of effect don't get affected as the 'glitterdust' has settled on whatever was there, be it creatures or the floor.

I recently had the same question raised in another game, we agreed that after the initial round the partials settled so others entering the area were not blinded or needed to make a save. those covered by the dust continue to sparkle until it fades as does the area about it.

I would say yes, and yes for glitterdust as well.

Question to clarify for me. I have always played entangle, since way back in the dawn of time, as being useable on non-living plant matter, as well as living plant matter. I just got called out by a rules-lawyer, that it shouldn't apply to non-living plants. Not that I am going to change my ruling now that I have made it (you guys have been walking through this scenario....you need some challenge), but I would like to get others opinions on this.

Hmmm... that is tough. By RAW, the plants don't need to be alive... but the intuitive part of me says, well of course the plants need to be alive! But maybe the plants are well-preserved/hibernating? Zombies can move, and they are dead... zombie plants?

By RAW, I think you are correct... This is the kind of area where GM rulings are needed. As a GM, your say is the law of the land.

This is tougher than anticipated, just curious, what's the situation in which you're using it? what are the dead plants?

oh....dead vines hanging from a ceiling, straw scattered about on the floor, maybe a potted plant or two I'm not talking cotton and linen fibers here.

"OH MY GOD! MY UNDERWEAR IS TRYING TO STRANGLE ME!"

"Dude. Try silk."




in general, though....can you entangle someone with dead plant matter.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status